What's he supposed to do? Decline to spend any time with his in laws? Not go to their home, or vacation with them? (Also- you're making the assumption that the Middleton family paid for the entire trip and that William didn't contribute)

All of this to protest the fact that a supplier they use, whose practices they have no control over, engages in unethical labor practices? That's ridiculous.

Also, like I said before: what alternatives do you suggest for them? I did a quick check and I didn't find a supplier of these types of goods who DOESN'T use this kind of labor. Do you want them to shut down their business?

The system may be "immoral" but it is one we all benefit from and participate in. We want to buy products as cheaply as possible and will search to find the cheapest price, we do not worry about where the product was made or under what conditions. Very few people are willing to pay a higher price for the sake of "morality", their pocket book over rules such sensibilities. If we wanted to make a statement about such things we would organize boycotts but we don't. We use migrant workers and illegal aliens to harvest our crops, clean toilets and be nannies to our children and any other job we would rather not do ourselves.

People may talk about moral outrage but at the end of the day we want our goods and services at the lowest possible price and then we take the money we have left to buy a second or third car or a tv for the bedroom or bathroom or an expensive vacation or any other luxury we fancy..

The Middletons do not employ these people and they don't make any of the decisions related to the labor practices being described here. They purchase their goods from a wholesaler and then mark them up and resell them to the public. They're retailers- and not very big retailers! They're not a Walmart or a Tesco, who wield intense buying power and can influence suppliers. They're a smaller, family owned firm that buys goods from wholesalers and resells them- and we have no idea what markup they make.

Members who wish to discuss wage rates in the Third World, international trade, slave labour, the price of frozen foods, the minimum wage in the United States, the cost of components in iPhones, colonial practices in the 19th century, comparison of German education levels to those in Britain, the evils of capitalism, the status of Mexico and the value of the peso, sweatshops, free trade, flat screen TVs, etc etc, may do so in Members' Corner or in a website devoted to trade, finance and economics.

The headline is somewhat misleading as it doesn't refer to what most readers would think it refers to. He has two companies, Nice Group London Ltd (trading as Nice Cakes, still in start-up stage and not yet operational) and The Cake Kit Company, which has been operating for 5-6 years. It is the start-up company that has incurred a loss in its first year.

excerpts from the Telegraph link
Accounts filed at Companies House show that Nice Group London Ltd, set up in 2011, had losses of £16,858 at the end of April 2012. The balance sheet for Nice Group, signed by Mr Middleton, the company’s sole shareholder, states that: “The bank overdraft is secured by a member of the director’s family.”

Mr Middleton told The Daily Telegraph that the firm was still "in the early stages of development. Nice Group is a start-up company and as you can imagine there are overheads needed to start a company. I made the decision to finance the business myself along with a loan rather than go to investors. This has its pros and cons, it does mean things don’t move as quickly as I would like but it does mean I keep complete ownership and control over my company. It is not uncommon for start-up companies to make a loss in the early stages of development and it is not something I am concerned about right now. On the contrary I am very excited as after running a pilot over 2012, Nice Cakes will be officially launching later this year."

He also runs another business, The Cake Kit Company, which has won several awards since it was launced in 2007 and also needed a bank loan before it went into profit.

Part of me is reluctant to post this article, but I just wanted posters to be aware that the Daily Mail's campaign against the Middletons continues. A couple of weeks ago it was an attack on Party Pieces, this time it's the turn of James Middleton:

I'm not going to read it. But I will say that someone's sexulatity is their own business; start up companies do not always make money in their first year (mine didn't) and whoever gave any private photographs to a newspaper is a disgrace.

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,

I wish I hadn't read it, cepe, but I feel there are some posters here who don't want to acknowledge the campaign that the DM is clearly waging against the Middletons. Some here choose to see the Daily Mail as some sort of all-knowing barometer of British public opinion, when all it is is complete and total trash.

I don't buy the conspiracy theory. To me they are your average celebrity rag covering...celebrities. That usually means dirt is involved. Wouldn't go as far as to say they have it in for the Middletons.

They do include the best and most comprehensive selection of photographs which will secure readership. And everyone knows that sex, dirt and drama sells. The perfect combination for the masses. They are just sticking to the sales formula that works best. Morals are not of interest to them I think, just reader numbers.